The Reasoning behind The Sundering? (*6.0 Endwalker Spoilers*)

[SpectrePhantasia]

Read through this thread, and the thoughts on what Venat did and whether she was justified...

I won't deny that the Ancients most assuredly held fundamentally different values toward life and the lives of their creations. However, while they may be alien in some ways, I do not think they are so disconnected from normal humanity that their views cannot be understood realistically, or aligned with our own. I would argue the Ancients have more similarities with us than they do differences, and those differences can be rationally understood. Death in and of itself for example was not a terrible thing for them, so much so that the term 'death' was scarcely used. This was because their lives spanned a nigh-on eternity, and they could live as much as they pleased. They also understood the world's cycle of rebirth, and that death is not the end of things. As such, they were happily willing to offer new insight as the person that they would become, when their duty reached an end. However, what was an unprecedented and awful thing to even consider for them, was the idea of a death that was not on the person's own terms. "Such tragedy, yet no catharsis." In that sense, life is absolutely important, as well as the individual contributions of the person living it. Venat putting the entire world in a state where no one can choose their own fate in the end is the worst thing imaginable for the Ancients.

That was also why being sacrificed to Zodiark was absolutely an act of altruism, and why Emet-selch, a fellow Ancient, frames it as such in Shadowbringers. Because they are voluntarily removing themselves from the lifestream to feed Zodiark's strength; to save everyone. They are condemning themselves to what they perceive to be an awful fate for the sake of those they love. It's not that they have less of a value for life, it's that their understanding of life is different.

Hermes sadness regarding the fates of the Ancient's creations was reasonable, but in the end, he refused to turn this sadness into something that would make for constructive change in his society, and it warped into essentially 'how dare people be happy in a society where I am unhappy.' And we know this change is possible, we sow some of the seeds of it ourselves. Ancients are introduced to the idea of valuing past creations more deeply, and are confronted with the notion of such lives they create not being simple aether, and like them, having the ability to host a soul. That capacity for change was there, as both Emet-selch and Hythlodaeus, staunch representatives of the Ancient's fundamental way of living, were able to see things from that perspective eventually. It's just that neither Hermes nor Venat were willing to put in the effort to enact that change themselves. In my view, they gave up on their people, where we wouldn't have, especially by not informing the Ancients that there was ever an 'underlying issue' in the first place.

[Vyrerus]

Bacon and Neckties

An interesting set of thoughts, and I had to stop myself from meandering down and muckin' about on TV Tropes, because the way that site is written is just too damn engaging lmao. I had many laughs, thank you.

But I disagree for a few reasons. I'll start with the idea that the Ancients failed Hermes's test.

The Ancients weren't actually presented with Hermes's test. Not by Hermes and not by Venat. The Meteion Hivemind, and its will to end all life is the actual test. But due to not having any information about her due to the amnesia machine and Venat being unwilling to share her memories via Echo, they were essentially asked to solve an equation for an absolute numerical value when only presented with variables. Basically, solve for X in A + BX = Y.

They came up with X = (Y-A)/B, but Venat wanted the actual numerical values, without actually handing them any numerals to work with. Put another way, it's like being given an incomplete word problem, and then being punished for not finding a solution. Not enough information was provided to them to ever get the right solution. That is the real reason why Zodiark could never work.

Wasn't designed with the real solution as the goal, and more importantly, its designers weren't designing it for that in anyway shape or form.

As far as the alien morality aspect goes... Mmmm... The writers have actually handed us a very alien race of beings, but their desire with their tale is to make them as human as possible to give us an uplifting story to relate too, so they're never going to fully engage with that aspect of it. Most people won't either. It's also true that in the setting itself, these human-like aliens condemn Venat's actions as very bad, and Venat's own faction /self says they're going to be hated, reviled, by their kin for the rest of time.

With that in mind though, I've thought an awful lot about Etheirys and its beings. They are essentially beings of pure energy that inhabit flesh. There's a lot about their existence that is not explained in this regard, but it is true that they are tangible souls made of aether which choose to inhabit flesh in order to form lives. It's implied that they didn't always understand this, but in the times of the Ascians' civilization, they had progressed to a point where they did. By this point they'd found a way for their, "adamant souls" to cause their flesh to live for as long as they willed it. Further understanding that when the flesh perishes, the soul returns to the planet, and will eventually come back onto the physical plane in a new body. In this regard, nothing on Etheirys dies unless the aether of its soul is somehow destroyed.

This means that neither the Sundering nor the Rejoinings actually killed any souls of Etheirys, and actually killed no one. Unless we want to go into the philosophy on identity, which both eliminated(or at least damaged) on large scales.

Endwalker does present the possibility that not all souls stay whole in the Aetherial Realm, and that they disintegrate eventually to become raw aether to fuel the creation by the planet of new souls, which will go on to engender flesh someday. We're not shown any examples, but perhaps it was just illustrating that the modern era scholars aren't in the know, and that this half of the hypothesis is wrong.

Anyway though, in regards to the loss of identity as being a moral dilemma, I'd say this is what Hermes's character revolves around. His big beef with the Ancients not valuing all life stems from the ancients dispelling their creations due to the things intrinsic to the creation's identity. Super violent mega predator that's, "Too Violent?" Eliminate it. Recreate it to be less violent. Well, then is it even the same creation anymore? No. Hence why he sought to at least preserve the conception of that "life."

The closest, "real" story that I can think of that plays in a similar vein to this is the movie Gattaca (1997). In that movie, our real world future is portrayed at being at a point where genetics has advanced to a point where pre-natal development can be controlled to remove all susceptibility to hereditary disease, immunodeficiency, addictive susceptibility, eye color, hair color, skin complexion, baldness, myopia etc. Everything that could define a person can be controlled.

We have no examples of Ancients doing that with their magicks, only with their laissez-faire societal customs. No one's personal limitations were ever corrected for. No one was enforced to die(return), though all were enforced outside of private or select locations to robe up, cowl up, and mask on. Even that had exceptions though, such as those marked by white robes or red masks.

This strange, alien society is said to have world peace, solved world hunger, no disease. Bereavement only possible through violence.

So perhaps Venat's real crime is affecting control over life via violent magic. Asserting the will of one over the will of the collective as well as the will of every individual. While simultaneously failing to discard that society's methods.

Because it's not mankind nor the concept of man that accepts, and is given the actual test; then passes it. It is one, idealized and idolized individual. An anointed chosen one birthed by the murder of original man. Prepared and groomed for the role, and given every tool past, present, and future to ensure success. If all of that is what's required to be worthy of life, then no basic concept for the worthiness of life exists.

Brings a whole new meaning to, "Prove your worth."

[RoroCookies]

Because it's not mankind nor the concept of man that accepts, and is given the actual test; then passes it. It is one, idealized and idolized individual. An anointed chosen one birthed by the murder of original man. Prepared and groomed for the role, and given every tool past, present, and future to ensure success. If all of that is what's required to be worthy of life, then no basic concept for the worthiness of life exists.

Brings a whole new meaning to, "Prove your worth."

Honestly when you put it that way. This test of mankind ending up a test more for our Azem. Our character is guided and 'chosen' to carry the entire weight of the world. If it wasn't for us, mankind would've just failed the test anyway because no one else has personal ties to the ancients like our Azem did. This really has me thinking and I am now bothered by it ahaha.

[Absimiliard]

I think there can be little doubt that the Ancients held themselves as being a tier apart from their creations, above them and fundamentally superior and of greater intrinsic importance. Certainly, they might favor such creations, bear affection for them - but that affection is much like the affection that we have for pets, even in cases where the creations are clearly intelligent beings. Several of the Elpis quests made it quite clear that even intelligent creations were seen as disposable and replaceable (such as the quest where we're instructed to allow the beast to rip us apart if it became a choice between its life and ours - it's an important research specimen, after all, and we're just a familiar!).

More than that, though, there were some strong hints that the Ancients did not hold their OWN lives in especially high regard, either. It's a regular occurrence, for instance, for an Ancient to simply decide that they've done enough and that it is time to die. Half of all the Ancients decided to sacrifice their own lives to birth Zodiark, and while that seems like a breathtaking spectacle of altruism from our perspective, to the Ancients it might not have been quite so unimaginable.

Is there really anything wrong with the Ancients viewing their creations as no higher than animals? Whether intelligent or not, those beings were given life primarily as a means of furthering the growth of Etheirys. While some (such as Meteion, being the prime example) were made with a specific purpose in mind, most were meant to spread and reproduce, such that increasing amounts of aether would be added to the world via the cycle of life and death. Even culling some of their own creations to bring back those sacrificed to Zodiark seems pretty acceptable when one considers this.

For the matter of the Ancients' own lives; they would choose to die because they felt it was their duty to return to Etheirys. It wasn't about a lack of care for themselves so much as a greater care for the whole. The immense amount of aether possessed by each Ancient meant such sacrifices were an excellent way of nourishing the world they so loved. As for the choice, what else could they do? A creature that cannot die of old age and possessed of such immense power is unlikely to meet its end through any natural means. More Ancients being born than die would both harm Etheirys by taking too much aether and harm the creatures living there through the resulting overpopulation. I would further contend that their willingness to sacrifice themselves to Zodiark stemmed not from a disregard for life but from an abiding love for it. To give up your own life so that your world, your loved ones, and people you haven't or never will meet can go on living for another day could easily be seen as the ultimate act of love for life. The fact that even more Ancients were then willing to die so that Zodiark could fix the damage done to their world - more specifically, so that it would be able to sustain the survivors - also speaks volumes.

[Lersayil]

Is there really anything wrong with the Ancients viewing their creations as no higher than animals? Whether intelligent or not, those beings were given life primarily as a means of furthering the growth of Etheirys. While some (such as Meteion, being the prime example) were made with a specific purpose in mind, most were meant to spread and reproduce, such that increasing amounts of aether would be added to the world via the cycle of life and death. Even culling some of their own creations to bring back those sacrificed to Zodiark seems pretty acceptable when one considers this.

For the matter of the Ancients' own lives; they would choose to die because they felt it was their duty to return to Etheirys. It wasn't about a lack of care for themselves so much as a greater care for the whole. The immense amount of aether possessed by each Ancient meant such sacrifices were an excellent way of nourishing the world they so loved. As for the choice, what else could they do? A creature that cannot die of old age and possessed of such immense power is unlikely to meet its end through any natural means. More Ancients being born than die would both harm Etheirys by taking too much aether and harm the creatures living there through the resulting overpopulation. I would further contend that their willingness to sacrifice themselves to Zodiark stemmed not from a disregard for life but from an abiding love for it. To give up your own life so that your world, your loved ones, and people you haven't or never will meet can go on living for another day could easily be seen as the ultimate act of love for life. The fact that even more Ancients were then willing to die so that Zodiark could fix the damage done to their world - more specifically, so that it would be able to sustain the survivors - also speaks volumes.

The story and narrative greatly emphasizes the value of life (at least the sentient, self-aware kind) and freedom of will. If the Ancients didn't hold these values, at least to some degree towards themselves and their creations, the sundered (and by extension we) would have no sympathy for them, no matter how lofty their ideals of "the greater good of the planet" were. It would also be much harder to sell them as objective superiors of the sundered, hence making much of Shb very one sided. The story needed them as sympathetic, thus they vaguely cared at least to an extent.

Blatant disregard for intelligent life and free will in the face of the "greater good" is a classic villain trope after all, not to mention any and all cautionary tales of artificial intelligence.

[Absimiliard]

I don't believe I would call their care vague at all. It's made pretty abundantly clear that, while they might not care about their creations the same way they would equals, many of them do care. As for intelligent life, I would note that we learn during our time in Elpis that sapient creations are extremely rare. Intelligence, sentience, and sapience are very different things, with sapience being the greatest of those considerations due to the possession of actual self-awareness. Meteion aside, their intelligent creations are not shown to be sapient although I do grant it is implied that a small minority of them probably are.

Beyond that you've got their care for one another as well as the greater whole, both of which have been made quite blatant since we first learned the true purpose of the Ascians from Emet-Selch.

[Lersayil]

As for intelligent life, I would note that we learn during our time in Elpis that sapient creations are extremely rare.

Could you provide citation? I might've just missed it, but the only thing I recall about intelligent creations is the overall lack of their presence in Elpis and information about them. I remember the bit about creations with souls, but I don't recall any connection drawn between having a soul and intelligence.

I was actually under the impression the writers were intentionally avoiding the subject (aside from Meteion), as its a very deep can of worms.

[Denishia]

The story and narrative greatly emphasizes the value of life (at least the sentient, self-aware kind) and freedom of will. If the Ancients didn't hold these values, at least to some degree towards themselves and their creations, the sundered (and by extension we) would have no sympathy for them, no matter how lofty their ideals of "the greater good of the planet" were. It would also be much harder to sell them as objective superiors of the sundered, hence making much of Shb very one sided. The story needed them as sympathetic, thus they vaguely cared at least to an extent.

Blatant disregard for intelligent life and free will in the face of the "greater good" is a classic villain trope after all, not to mention any and all cautionary tales of artificial intelligence.

I think where the subjective opinions on the Unsundered, at least where I know I am differing, in that I found the presentation of the Ancient to fail at showing them as objective superiors of the sundered - their lifestyle may have had material comforts than the Sundered -at least for the people shown living in Amaurot and Elpis, and again my suspicions of what the rest of the planet and the other inhabitants for Etheirys remain, because it has been so vague and because the societies that have been created as echoes of theirs (Allag and Garlemald) had very high standards of living for its citizens at the expense of anyone that was not part of their privileged upper-class. Cynicism, perhaps, but I still don't trust the Ancient Society as a Utopia - and I certainly dislike their societal pressure for 'fulfil additions of creations for 'betterment of planet', nebulously defined' and then commit ritual suicide. But I compare them to ARR Alphinaud for a reason- that brand of idealistic but immature patronization, which is both sympathetic but grating and less preferable to post-development Alphinaud. There's a side-quest option with Clarion where you can tell her what you think of the Ancients- either they seem like gods or they're just like us- and I wish there was another option to compare them to ...well, the Lopporits.

[Lersayil]

I think where the subjective opinions on the Unsundered, at least where I know I am differing, in that I found the presentation of the Ancient to fail at showing them as objective superiors of the sundered - their lifestyle may have had material comforts than the Sundered -at least for the people shown living in Amaurot and Elpis, and again my suspicions of what the rest of the planet and the other inhabitants for Etheirys remain, because it has been so vague and because the societies that have been created as echoes of theirs (Allag and Garlemald) had very high standards of living for its citizens at the expense of anyone that was not part of their privileged upper-class. Cynicism, perhaps, but I still don't trust the Ancient Society as a Utopia - and I certainly dislike their societal pressure for 'fulfil additions of creations for 'betterment of planet', nebulously defined' and then commit ritual suicide. But I compare them to ARR Alphinaud for a reason- that brand of idealistic but immature patronization, which is both sympathetic but grating and less preferable to post-development Alphinaud. There's a side-quest option with Clarion where you can tell her what you think of the Ancients- either they seem like gods or they're just like us- and I wish there was another option to compare them to ...well, the Lopporits.

Lets not open up that discussion again... it was quite the hot and overly debated topic during Shb. What I was trying to get at wasn't that they were factually superior, but that the story (in Shb at least) had to present that notion in a way where its at least debatable, otherwise there was no way anyone could sympathize with Emets argument.

But you did remind me of something! Lopporits and the Watcher. Both examples seem at the very least sapient, and at least in the case of the moon rabbits intelligent... sorta. I think? Unless they are special due to Hydaelyn powers they are examples of intelligent life mass manufactured by an Ancient.

[Denishia]

I do think that the Lopporits have souls- or at least I am going to treat them as any other race with whom I assume also does. The Watcher right now I lump in with a Primal- or perhaps slightly below, as it does seem more like an automated program than the others.